Posted on 10/31/2018 7:06:49 AM PDT by Kaslin
Democrats are hoping the coming election will give them a majority in the House of Representatives. Republicans and much of our nation dread that prospect. My question is: What would a House majority mean for the Democrats? Let's look at it.
To control the House of Representatives, Democrats must win at least 218 seats, which many predict as being likely. To control the Senate, Democrats must win enough seats to get to 51, which many predict is unlikely. Let's say the Democrats do take the House. If they were to pass a measure that Republicans in both houses didn't like and President Donald Trump didn't like, either, he could use his veto pen. To override Trump's veto, Democrats would need to meet the U.S. Constitution's requirement that they muster a two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives (290 votes) and a two-thirds vote in the Senate (67 votes). Neither would be likely.
It's quite a challenge to override a presidential veto. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was the veto king, with 635 vetoes. Only nine of them were overridden. President Grover Cleveland vetoed 584 congressional measures and was overridden only seven times. If the House Democrats were to do all that they promise to do and if President Trump were to marshal the guts of Presidents Roosevelt and Cleveland -- both Democrats, I might add -- the next two years would be a sight to behold.
But wait! Democrats are pushing for the elimination of the Electoral College and having presidents chosen by majority rule. Might they call for the same for all political decisions? That way, it would require only a simple majority vote, rather than two-thirds, to override a presidential veto.
The Founding Fathers had utter contempt for majority rule. They saw it as a form of tyranny. In addition to requiring a supermajority to override a presidential veto, our Constitution has other anti-majority provisions. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in each house of Congress or two-thirds of state legislatures to vote for it. On top of that, it requires three-fourths of state legislatures for ratification of a constitutional amendment. Election of the president is done not by a majority popular vote, much to the disappointment of the left, but by the Electoral College.
Having two houses of Congress places another obstacle to majority rule. Fifty-one senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators. As mentioned earlier, our Constitution gives the president veto power to thwart the wishes of a majority in each house of Congress. It takes two-thirds in each house of Congress to override the president's veto.
The Founders recognized that we need government; however, they also recognized that the essence of government is force and that force is evil. To reduce the potential for evil, they thought government should be as small as possible. They intended for us to have a limited republican form of government wherein human rights precede government and there is rule of law. Ordinary citizens and government officials are accountable to the same laws. Government intervenes in civil society only to protect its citizens against force and fraud; it does not intervene in cases of peaceable, voluntary exchange. By contrast, in a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. The law is whatever the government deems it to be. Rights may be granted or taken away.
For those Americans who see majority rule as sacrosanct, ask yourselves how many of your life choices you would like settled by majority rule. Would you want the kind of car you own to be decided through a democratic process? What about decisions as to where you live, what clothes you purchase, what food you eat, what entertainment you enjoy and what wines you drink? I'm sure that if anyone suggested that these decisions should be subject to a democratic process wherein majority rules, we would deem the person tyrannical.
James Madison wrote, "Democracies ... have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
I cannot imagine the GOP turn-out will not break records. We are fired up!
Supposedly said by Ben Franklin
Soon to come: Majority rules Juries.
They have no prayer of getting any legislation past the Senate so they will spend all of their time launching mini-Mueller investigations trying to take down Trump.
Do you REALLY want that, America?
It’s “Democrat”, not ‘Democratic”.
Words mean things.
This election is not about passing laws or vetoing legislation.
It is about who will be the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Will it be Chairman Devin Nunes or Chairman Adam Schiff?
Your vote could help decide.
And originally the Senate represented the states until the 17th amendment.
The American people, all of them, better come to their senses and think and act strategically as they cast their votes, between today and next Tuesday, November 6, 2018. Why?
Because they, and they alone, have the once in a lifetime opportunity and chance to totally render the entire Socialist, Communist, Progressive Democrat Party totally ineffective politically, simply by voting for the POTUS, Donald J. Trump, GOP Team come next week.
They must realize, this coming election has consequences both good & bad for them. It is quite simple....Trump good....Schumer/Pelosi bad. There is no in between to be had. it is as clear plain and simple as is the nose on your face.
If the Trump Team wins both the House & Senate next week, the Democrat Party dies politically....that’s it, in a nutshell. It’s your choice Mr. & Ms. Jane & Jim America!!!
Go, POTUS, Trump, Go, GOP, Go, GOTV, GO Trump MEGA Rallies, Go, Trump MAGA rallies...on to victory!!! Folks...just get out and vote!!!
If you really believe that, wouldn’t you want you use the actual name?
I don’t care, but facts is facts.
Actually, the title is correct. The word "Party" was left out but implied.
There is no DEMOCRAT PARTY, it is the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
I seriously doubt we lose the house.
I view America as a collection of somewhat independent states. If a given state has a large population, fine, but it shouldn’t have the power to push around other states.
Our senate/house arrangement is perfect. One represents states and the other population.
Regarding a possible winning of the House by Democrats, if that happens Trump will continue to push conservative ideas and by 2020 more citizens will look favorably at those ideas.
No, the Senate no longer represents states. Since the 17th amendment, 'states' are not represented. The Senate just became a 'super' house of representatives, which in effect is representative of the big urban centers.
“No, the Senate no longer represents states”
Seems like it does because each state has 2 senators.
If the big states influence the little states’ senators, that’s a 2nd order effect and in any event the senators represent the voters with each state. The system is in place. If voters screw it up, so be it.
Do you REALLY want that, America?
I would not. But if the Trump Administration does what the Obama Administration did and refuses to cooperate with any of Pelosi's demands involving these investigations, other than holding it in contempt of Congress, there's not much she can do about it. Look at Eric Holder. He was held in contempt of Congress, and the overall response to that has been a big yawn.
My biggest concern about losing the House is that we can forget about things like making the tax cuts permanent and getting that border wall built.
The Senate does keep small states represented in the Presidential election via the distribution of the electoral votes of the electoral college. But that is the only remaining “states representation” the Senate makeup performs. Senators are now beholding to the majority of each state, not the state legislatures, as they should be, and as was envisioned by the founders. The HoR was supposed to be the ‘peoples’ representation. Again, ‘states’ are no longer represented, just majorities of the voting districts, however you define those districts. The 17th amendment most us a step closer to a democracy, and away from a republic. Bad move.
The 17th amendment moved us...
That tells you what the Founding Fathers though of pure democracy! Now only were they informed by their reading of history - democratic Athens’ failures (Something PEOPLE DO NOT DO TODAY!!! OOH HISTORY ITS SO BORING ALL THOSE DATES NAMES AS SUCH!). The FF’s were informed by their own times by watching the dysfunctional floundering government of Rhode Island. (The most democratic in governance of all the colonies/states! On May 20, 1790 with Rhode Island being the last state - 13.) Oddly enough modern Rhode Island has rediscovered its floundering ways!
Remember Franklin by a female on-looker said when asked the type of government we were going to have - “A republic ! If you can keep it!”
Its also important to note that Franklin was one of the more “democracy oriented” delegates.
“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.